Posts: 12
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
So I know there are plenty of guys on here that chase the lake trout in the summer. I am interested in trying for these this year in the boat. I was watching Hooked on Utah the other night and I am wondering what you guys believe the best setup is for hardware when jigging for them. It looked like to me they were using shorter poles....Anyways any input would be greatly appreciated on what you think is the ideal rod and reel set up....Thanks
[signature]
Posts: 2,044
Threads: 5
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation:
0
Well, I kinda started the short rod thing when everybody else was using the 7-footers. Now, of course, everybody's going shorter. I use 45-inch custom ones because I can't buy what I want. Shorter the better though IMO.
Shimano Calcuttas for reels. Not everybody's on board with that, yet, but most are, and those that aren't will be some day after crying all the way home, or are just too hard-headed (or can't afford one) to drop a couple hundred. They're the ones who post sillly stuff about fighting some 1,200 pound laker for 26 hours and the fish "spit the hook out." Please.
A properly set Calcutta drag with a 3 1/2 foot "pole" should land ANY laker in the Gorge in 20 minutes or less if the angler actually pulls on it. And the hook isn't likely to tear out either. Note: A fish has never in the history of the planet "spit out" a hook caught in its flesh. Fish don't spit anyway. The hook is pulled out, from a force on it, on the other end of the line to which it is tied, usually due to angler error, and a less-than-perfectly-smooth drag.
When you're starting out, the rod, line, reel, and jig aren't near as important as what you do with them, and you can only learn that on the water. With someone who's done it, or a guide, or lots of trial and error on your own. All 3 work. You learn quicker with some than others.
[signature]
Posts: 14,302
Threads: 181
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation:
15
Jim do you use the same rod/ reel setup on ice to catch the big boys? I'm going to about that length rod on the ice and really like it so far, but I haven't caught a real fish to know how it would work on them. Thanks J
[signature]
Posts: 3,131
Threads: 86
Joined: Sep 2007
Reputation:
4
[quote Tarponjim]Well, I kinda started the short rod thing when everybody else was using the 7-footers. Now, of course, everybody's going shorter. I use 45-inch custom ones because I can't buy what I want. Shorter the better though IMO.
Shimano Calcuttas for reels. Not everybody's on board with that, yet, but most are, and those that aren't will be some day after crying all the way home, or are just too hard-headed (or can't afford one) to drop a couple hundred. They're the ones who post sillly stuff about fighting some 1,200 pound laker for 26 hours and the fish "spit the hook out." Please.
A properly set Calcutta drag with a 3 1/2 foot "pole" should land ANY laker in the Gorge in 20 minutes or less if the angler actually pulls on it. And the hook isn't likely to tear out either. Note: A fish has never in the history of the planet "spit out" a hook caught in its flesh. Fish don't spit anyway. The hook is pulled out, from a force on it, on the other end of the line to which it is tied, usually due to angler error, and a less-than-perfectly-smooth drag.
When you're starting out, the rod, line, reel, and jig aren't near as important as what you do with them, and you can only learn that on the water. With someone who's done it, or a guide, or lots of trial and error on your own. All 3 work. You learn quicker with some than others.[/quote]
Don't listed to this guy, has no idea what he speaks of! [  ][ ][ ]
[signature]
Posts: 2,044
Threads: 5
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation:
0
Ice? Whats that?[laugh] I wouldnt even waste my time with ice, but I know a few other desperate souls who use them through those little holes and love them. About a third of my rod orders are from people who want them for ice fishing.
Most have heard my reasoning for not ice fishing, so I will spare the speech. I really have plenty of productive things to do for the 8-10 week frozen season though, including building rods for ice fishermen! [laugh] They were designed just for jigging big lakers, with light line, 1 oz jigs, and sharp hooks.
[signature]
Posts: 14,302
Threads: 181
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation:
15
Thanks Jim....
[signature]
Posts: 231
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation:
0
When did you start the short rod thing?
I'm very interested in that.
I had no idea people used short rods for lakers.
[signature]
Posts: 42
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
Wouldn't catch me dead using a short rod jigging lakers in open water. Longer rod, medium fast-medium action to keep tension on the lure in the fishes jaw. Your short rods interest me for ice fishing, but kinda laughable for open water. I'm open to new ideas but a rod that short in open water does not make any sense. Would have no problem being proved wrong however.
[signature]
Posts: 2,044
Threads: 5
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation:
0
Fished 4 1/2 footers myself since the late 80's. Started using trying shorter ones about 4 years ago. Finally settled on length and on a couple tapers that were right 3 years ago. Started letting customers fish 'em two seasons ago. Nobody has said they want to go back to the longer ones. In fact, I often get asked, "can you build me two just like these?"
Ive sold 60 in two years. Lots are copying them now too.
as to fin addict, do your thing. The physics behind the form, posture, grip, lure presentation, hooks used, line used, and boat positioning support short rods making perfect sense. "Tension" to keep a hook in the mouth? huh? I can keep way more than I want wiith them, and still have to keep my drags pretty light. 10 times as many hooks are pulled due to too much pressure than not enough.
keep using long rods and reefin' on em though. Definitely don't change what is working for you.
[signature]
Posts: 42
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
Yep. Constant tension on the hook catches fish. That's the reason you pointed out why "fish spit hooks" as I agree with you they don't spit hooks. Fisherman lose tension on the hook and the hook pops loose. I wasn't attacking your methods, I even said I would love to be proved wrong. I said it does not make sense based on over 30 years of fishing. A longer, maybe a little slower rod with line that stretches, like mono, makes a lot more sense to keep constant pressure on a SHARP hook in the fishes jaw a lot more than a short rod, but like I said, I'm open to new ideas and would love to be proven wrong (especially when it comes to fishing) because I love to learn new ideas and techniques. Wasn't attacking your methods so take a pill man, just doesn't make sense to me. I'll eat crow if proven wrong though.
Also, please explain the "physics." The only thing physics would have to do with it would be Newtons laws which deal with force, mass and acceleration and have nothing to do with "posture" or "hooks used" or "grip" or "boat positioning" or anything like that. Again, I am open to being proven wrong, however.
[signature]
Posts: 231
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation:
0
3.5 ' rod, interesting. I started getting serious about lakers in 2002, thought of a genius idea, a short heavy rod, I had to make my own at the time, intil 2004. I found a 4.5 ' rod. I have caught a lot of fish on, I thought I was the only one fishing short rods[ ]
I have never thought of going shorter,
People would always make fun of my little shorty, but at the end of the day they admired it!!
This year I went back to a 6.6 and have actually lost 2, I lose them at the hook set, I blame myself for not being familiar with the new rod.
And as for spitting out??? I have personally and have friends that have witnessed the lure coming out of the mouth of bigger fish as they get closer to the hole or boat, it's chalked up in my book as not a set hook, I think that some of the bigger fish have a stronger grip on the lure, and the hook was never set, and eventually the fish opens it's mouth releasing the lure, and this is done with full tension on rod and line.
But fish in different waters react differently sometimes,
I guess if it's workin for ya, why change.
[signature]
Posts: 2,044
Threads: 5
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation:
0
Well, I'm still learnin' I guess. I'm not going to get into the intricacies of the physics of vertical laker fishing on a public forum. Besides, there's not much to it. Drop somethin' down there, jig it, get a bite, jerk on it, and haul 'em in. It ain't rocket science.
And just for the record, my rods are slow. That's part of the equation. Being able to keep tension is not an issue. That can be done with nearly any rod, and especially the ones I build for this.
There's a lot more to physics than F=M*A. Speed (different from acceleration), angles, angles of force, conservation of motion and energy, etc etc. Of course, I only have about 4,300 days of mack fishing under my belt, most of which are observing people trying to set a hook and get a fish to the boat, so again, I've still got lot to learn.
My senseless thoughts:
A softer rod is needed for braid, not mono. You can have a stiffer rod with mono because it stretches AFTER the fish is hooked. (a force on EACH end, not just one).
I've filmed hundreds of hooked lake trout in the water at all depths, and have never seen one hold on to a lure without the hook lodged in its mouth. Pike, yes. Not lakers. Hooks tear out of the mouth. You'd have to have total slack with under a pound of force, at least, for gravity or another force to permit a hook/lure to simply fall out. Hooks don't come out in the opposite direction they go in. Therefore, if the hook is "in" to begin with, then it comes out by tearing the flesh to which it has been caught in to begin with.
Boat positioning affects angle of presentation. Boat positioning affects angle of pull. Angler posture affects reaction time. Angler posture affects angle of hook-set, which affects force. Hook sharpness and force determine hook penetration. Hook sharpness and force to set a hook are directly related. The grip on the rod determines, individually, the speed and force of the hook set, as well as the force put on the fish after the hook set. Big Time. (This is how the great Stu Apte, as well as others, hook and land 150+ pound tarpon on a fly rod with a 12-pound leader!!) They know how to use angles for the right force at the right time. But what do I know?
Below is a photo of one of my 42-inch rods hooked to a fish. Does anybody think there's a chance in hell their will be any slack in that line? All you gotta do is reel a little, lift, and keep it tight. Drag was set at 4 pounds. (Measured!)
If anyone needs to know more, the place to learn it or see it is on my boat. Many here have, so they know what I mean and likely have seen what I'm saying in action. All I did was try to help the original question. Short rods work better than long rods. (And in my case, its a darned good thing![laugh])
[inline "full flex-1.PNG"]
[signature]
Posts: 12
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
Thanks everyone for the replies. I realize that everyone has there own ideas and I have a lot to learn. Maybe going with a guide a few times is the thing to do to get the hang of things. As I have learned more and more about ice fishing and using flashers, the presentation of the lure is what catches the fish not the pole you are using. Lots of factors need to be taken into account. I am sure it is the same way with these big lake trout but the thought of pulling up one of these beasts certainly intrigues me very much....
[signature]
Posts: 2,044
Threads: 5
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation:
0
[quote humminbirdin] the presentation of the lure is what catches the fish not the pole you are using. [/quote]
You're ahead of the game already right there! A shorter stick will let you be more precise in your presentation.
Take a pen and write with it. Now take the same pen, and hold it by the eraser end and write with it. Now attach it to, say, a 12" ruler, and try writing with it again holding the end of the ruler.
See? Control is easier the closer you are to the "point." The point in our discussion is the rod tip. The closer your hands are to it, the more precise you can be.
[signature]
Posts: 42
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
You're the one that brought physics into the this discussion so the burden of proof is on you for proving what you claim. If
You're going to claim physics as your basis show me and others some mathematical equations to prove your claims. Just as you I can argue the use of longer rods versus shorter ones. Has to do a hell of a lot more with action, rod speed, and angler experience, and line selection than rod length. I can teach someone how to use a 9' long rod with the right line, reel, and rod action and speed as you can with your short rods. I can keep just as much tension and drag on those fish and catch jut as many fish. Guaranteed. I just found it falsifying and misleading to tell people that physics had anything to do with it. That short rods are somehow "scientifically superior" based on "physics" as you claim, this longer rods. A seriously misguided claim. Prove me wrong though and I'll sing your praises. I'll happily buy one of your rods and pit against any of mine and see which one performs the best. My feeling is it has a hell of lot more to do with experience than the individual rod.
[signature]
Posts: 474
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
0
As far as going with a guide or something......Your talking to probably one of the best laker guides in the west. I would love to know the actual number of lakers that have been in Tarpinjim's boat, and im not talking 10lbers. I bet you wouldn't believe it when you heard the number.[shocked]
I have one of jims poles and I think it works great.[cool]
.
[signature]
Posts: 42
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
I'm sure it is and I'll try one without prejudice. I also feel that guides are somewhat of a hoax as far as fishing goes. With enough research and study of a species a guide is not needed.
[signature]
Posts: 1,010
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation:
0
[quote Fin_Addict]You're the one that brought physics into the this discussion so the burden of proof is on you for proving what you claim. If You're going to claim physics as your basis show me and others some mathematical equations to prove your claims. Just as you I can argue the use of longer rods versus shorter ones. Has to do a hell of a lot more with action, rod speed, and angler experience, and line selection than rod length. I can teach someone how to use a 9' long rod with the right line, reel, and rod action and speed as you can with your short rods. I can keep just as much tension and drag on those fish and catch jut as many fish. Guaranteed. I just found it falsifying and misleading to tell people that physics had anything to do with it. That short rods are somehow "scientifically superior" based on "physics" as you claim, this longer rods. A seriously misguided claim. Prove me wrong though and I'll sing your praises. I'll happily buy one of your rods and pit against any of mine and see which one performs the best. My feeling is it has a hell of lot more to do with experience than the individual rod.[/quote]
Holy crap, you're a condescending, know-it-all.
[quote Fin_Addict]I'm sure it is and I'll try one without prejudice. I also feel that guides are somewhat of a hoax as far as fishing goes. With enough research and study of a species a guide is not needed.[/quote]
Wow.
[#bf0000]TBD- reel it in man[/#bf0000]
Posts: 2,044
Threads: 5
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation:
0
Fin Addict, I don't have to prove anything to anybody, and aren't trying to. I'll stand on my record. Besides, its all a hoax!
I helped the original poster, and he said so and thanked me for it, so stay out of it if you don't like it.
I'm out. And inbeforethelock too. Win Win for Mr. Hoax again!
[signature]
Posts: 474
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
0
My wife wanted a purple jigging pole so she copied my Cptn jim pole. its about 8" longer with a little bit longer grip. I think it turned out nice.
.
[signature]
|
